CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 71Head and Neck Cancer StudiesGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningOral Health Pathology and Treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Socio-demographic factors in the prognosis of oral cancer patients

Wong, Yong-Kie, Tsai, Wen-Chen, Lin, Jin-Ching, Poon, Chiu-Kwan, Chao, Shou-Yee, Hsiao, Ying-Lyung, Chan, Man-Yee, Cheng, Chi-Sheng, Wang, Chen-Chi, Wang, Ching-Ping, Liu, Shih-An·2006·Oral Oncology
DOI 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2005.12.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the survival rate of oral cancer patients treated in a medical center in central Taiwan and to investigate whether socio-demographic factors influence their survival. We retrospectively reviewed 1010 chart records of oral cancer patients. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model was used for investigating the relationship between socio-demographic factors and survival. The overall 5-year survival rate was 63.24%. Multivariate analysis revealed that those without religious belief tended to have higher probability of death than those who had religious belief (relative risk (RR): 2.057, p<0.001). In addition, those who were single, widow/widower or divorced/separated had a poorer prognosis than those who were married (RR: 1.528, p=0.008). Apart from clinical features, socio-demographic factors also significantly influenced the survival of oral cancer patients. Therefore, care providers should take socio-demographic issues into consideration aside from ordinary clinical health care.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2005.12.007

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wong, Y.-K., Tsai, W.-C., Lin, J.-C., Poon, C.-K., Chao, S.-Y., Hsiao, Y.-L., Chan, M.-Y., Cheng, C.-S., Wang, C.-C., Wang, C.-P., & Liu, S.-A.
Affiliations
  • Taichung Veterans General Hospital (TW)
  • China Medical University (TW)
Corresponding author
Liu, Shih-An
ORCID
Venue
Oral Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-10
Volume
42
Issue
9
Pages
893-906
ISSN
1368-8375 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.oraloncology.2005.12.007
OpenAlex
W2157471954
Cited by
71
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Oral Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Head and Neck Cancer Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › General Dentistry › Oral Health Pathology and Treatment
Keywords
oral cancer, sociodemographic factors, survival, prognosis, religious beliefs, marital status, social status, cancer mortality
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Carcinoma, Squamous Cell, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mouth Neoplasms, Neoplasm Staging, Prognosis, Religion, Retrospective Studies, Social Class, Selection Bias, Proportional Hazards Models, Survival Analysis, Marital Status, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review